2017年7月18日火曜日

In the Nikkei newspaper,
University of Tokyo professor Noriyuki Yanagawa wrote an article titled, “With
IT Development, Investment will also Change.” This is a very important point.

His argument is as follows.

1. IT
such as the Internet, applications, social networking, etc., is already
becoming the base of an energized sharing economy and block chain. Google and
Amazon, etc., have developed open source AI and related services.

2.
These new technologies are infrastructure that stimulates investment. New types
of infrastructure like this are important, and IT and AI are the engines that
produce the new infrastructure, the infrastructure of infrastructure.

3.
Private sector companies are responsible for the new infrastructure, and have
the characteristic of encouraging change and development. The strategy is to
increase investment in superior new infrastructure, and thus increase the
number of businesses that use it.

This theory could lead to the
reform of public economics. Infrastructure such as roads, airports, water,
electric power, etc., which are public assets, have not been run as businesses,
but as a fulfillment of the “public” role of national and local governments,
charitable corporations, etc. Tax revenues and fees for usage covered the
costs.

The new infrastructure is
provided by purely private companies at no charge. By using economies of scale,
they receive revenues from derived business, as well as from big data such as
customer information.

As a supporter of this,
Professor Yanagawa has higher expectations for large corporations than for
venture companies. I also believe that, rather than depending on venture
companies because it’s a new field in Japan, it is more realistic to treat it
as infrastructure with large-scale investment from large companies.

However, one problem is that
both IT- and AI-related infrastructure cross national borders, and as
restrictions can’t be imposed on foreign investment, powerful global companies
tend to dominate. Another point is that national power can’t compete. This is
another reason why the concept of public economics as being based on measures
put into operation by sovereign nations must be reconsidered.

On the other hand, “the
failure of the markets” as described in public economics is another topic for
discussion here. The issue is how to overcome greatly reduced investment in
infrastructure. Professor Yanagawa also mentioned that the decline in capital
investment due to infrastructure utilization will lower the total economic
demand. I want him to analyze this as part of the study of economics.

Reaching across industries is
one of the characteristics of the new infrastructure. This is because new rules
different from conventional sector-specific business laws are required.

In order to maximize the
welfare of these new infrastructures, the recommended policy is to promote
investment and broaden the benefits of utilization.

The government must break
down the vertical divide, and decide on measures for the easing of regulations
and rules for the promotion of utilization. Tax measures to promote investment
in and use of the new infrastructure will also be effective.

On the other hand, targeting
measures to cultivate certain fields through subsidies are likely to fail.
Rather, it seems better to encourage private investment by making the
government itself a leader of demand.

For this reason, a
comprehensive strategy is required. The government offices of IT and
Intellectual Property are in charge of hardware/software strategy, and
Professor Yanagawa and I participate, but we really want a different strategy
theory to encourage new infrastructure investment.

2017年7月4日火曜日

According to a paper entitled
“The Collaboration of 3 Ministries for AI Research,” 3 government ministries,
the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry are collaborating to promote basic research, applied research,
standardization, and human resources development in the field of artificial
intelligence.

Research and development, as
well as demonstrations, will be conducted with the goal of implementation of
the Internet of Things, with AI at the core, in society and business. The
accumulation of big data in each field, and the quantitative and qualitative
expansion of sensors are advancing the IoT. The collaboration between
government ministries is meant to avoid focusing on AI research alone, and to
work towards implementation in society.

Newspapers reported that in
order to promote cooperative development with over 20 companies, the Ministry
of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology will request 10 billion
yen, which will become 100 billion yen over 10 years.

The idea has impact, but will
it work? and other typical concerns are coming up. The thought comes to mind
that if Google, Apple, and other corporate giants invest about that much into
the field a year, can the country really afford to spend its meager tax
revenues this way? It's hard to forget that the development of the 5th
generation of computers cost 50 billion yen over 10 years and still failed.

Apparently, however, this
move is different from what has happened up till now. That's what I felt after
speaking with officials at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science
and Technology. I offer 3 possible reasons.

1.
Selection

In April of 2016, Riken
Institute of Physical and Chemical Research launched the Center for Artificial
Intelligence Project. Masashi Sugiyama, a 41-year-old University of Tokyo
professor, was made director of the center. This shows an intention to entrust
this project to the young.

While putting heavyweights
like Takeo Kanade of Carnegie Mellon University and Masaru Kitsuregawa,
director of the National Institute of Informatics in charge as advisors, Dr.
Sugiyama has deployed 30 up-and-coming researchers, mostly in their 30s and
40s, to work underneath him.

The AIP Center would prefer
researchers in their 20s, but compared to every other such national policy up
till now, which mainly involved people in their 50s and 60s, this is a
drastically different human resources policy. The government is showing its
sense of impending crisis.

2.
Integration

When one hears of a
collaboration between 3 ministries, the typical image of a meeting with 3
representative bureaucrats shaking hands and not doing much of substance comes
to mind. However, this time the Riken Institute of Physical and Chemical
Research, the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology
(NICT), and the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and
Technology, each administered by one of the 3 ministries, will work together.

If the community comes
together as one, and if the government gives its encouragement, the researchers
will be filled with strength.

Back when the 5th generation
computer plan was proposed to the (former) Ministry of International Trade and
Industry, the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications was promoting a plan for
the development of a phone with automated translation (that I was in charge
of), and there was ruthless competition with, and even opposition to, AI
development. It was the epitome of the adverse effect of a vertically divided
government. Competition has value, but the Japan of today can’t afford it.

This time it is clearly
evident that they mean to work together.

3.
Humanities

The Research Institute of
Science and Technology for Society established the field of the human and
information ecosystem, which deals with social problems caused by technology
such as AI, IoT, big data, etc.

They will be tackling such
themes as law and regulations, ethics and philosophy, economics and employment,
education, etc.

AI and robots will steal
human jobs. Or they will cause accidents. The distribution of information will
lead to an incident. How can these and other anxieties floating around in
society be eliminated, or what measures can be taken to counter them? What does
society want from the progress of technology?

In conjunction with the
development of AI, expertise in these human matters also needs to be mobilized.
Even if AI technology is the same throughout the world, society’s reception of
it is a local problem. Whatever other countries do, Japan needs to deal with
it. I see seriousness in the attitude towards development integrating
humanities and the sciences.